Highlights—August 29, 2009

CNN/Money: IBM
Has Cut Around 10,000 US Jobs In 2009 - Union. Excerpt: International Business Machines Corp. (IBM) has laid
off approximately 10,000 - roughly double the reported figure - of its North American employees since the start
of the year, according to figures from a union. Lee Conrad, an organizer for the Communication Workers of America,
which is trying to push IBM employees to unionize, said IBM had made at least 9,308 job cuts since the start of
2009. The figure was calculated using data from redundancy packages, which are called "resource action packages" within
IBM. The bulk of the jobs lost were in the U.S., with a handful in Canada. The figures are likely conservative,
Conrad said, because they don't count contractors and staff who have lost their jobs but didn't get redundancy
packages or were transferred to different locations. ...

In March, The Wall Street Journal reported that IBM planned to lay off around 5,000 employees. Many of those
positions were to be transferred to India and other cheaper locations. Armonk, N.Y.-based IBM has been steadily
shifting its employee base to locations like India and reducing its U.S.-based workforce. Foreign-based workers
now account for more than 70% of its employees.

Yahoo! IBM Employee Issues message board: "Verified
IBM job cuts for 2009" by Lee Conrad, president Alliance@IBM.
Full excerpt: The following are the job cuts for 2009 as of August 24, 2009 that Alliance@IBM has verified through
the receipt of Resource Action packages:

Systems Technology Group = 1213 cut (Jan)

Software Group = 1419 (Jan)

Sales and Distribution
= 1449 (Jan)

IBM HR = 92 (Jan)

Marketing and Communications = 147 (Jan)

IBM Research = 193 (Jan)

IBM Finance = 307 (Jan)

US CIO = 411 (March)

Services Delivery = 985 (March)

GBS Application
Services = 1674 (March)

Global GTS = 181 (March)

Systems Technology Group = 37 (March)

GBS Application Services
= 462 (April)

ISC Global Supply = 245 (April)

Services Delivery = 87 (May)

Services Delivery = 222
(July)

GBS Industrial = 184 (Aug)

Total = 9308

We have received numerous reports of small job cuts over the past year that have not been
verified through RA packs. Employee force outs based on Management Initiated Separation also increased this
year. IBM contractors also are not included in IBM's Resource Action packages. We do not have numbers for these
3 categories but believe that these cuts added to the above push the total above 10,000.

Yahoo! IBM Employee Issues message board: "Re:
Verified IBM job cuts for 2009" by "ibmretiree2006". Full excerpt: As was noted on the Alliance
site, this does not include those who were "forced" into retirement to save someone's job. I know of
3 people in IGS who retired (were going to go within 24 months and one who saved a person's job who has medical
issues in the family).

Poughkeepsie Journal: Group
claims IBM cut 10,000 jobs in 2009. Local toll may have been 900, Alliance says. By Craig Wolf. Excerpts:
Asked to respond, IBM spokesman Douglas Shelton said in an e-mail the company isn't verifying specifics. He added, "Because
we are one of the largest knowledge-based businesses in the world, we rebalance parts of our skill base as client
demands evolve. Jobs are eliminated in one part of the business and created in other parts of the business where
clients demand more focus, a new skill set and/or new resources. And while we have eliminated some jobs this year,
IBM remains the largest tech employer in the U.S. and the world. We learned in the early '90s that those who wait
to address business and competitive issues in this industry don't survive. We have succeeded as a nearly 100-year-old
technology company by managing the business in this way." ...

He added, "Because we are one of the largest knowledge-based businesses in the world, we rebalance parts
of our skill base as client demands evolve. Jobs are eliminated in one part of the business and created in other
parts of the business where clients demand more focus, a new skill set and/or new resources. And while we have
eliminated some jobs this year, IBM remains the largest tech employer in the U.S. and the world. We learned in
the early '90s that those who wait to address business and competitive issues in this industry don't survive.
We have succeeded as a nearly 100-year-old technology company by managing the business in this way.

IBM will not change its "re balancing" until the Federal Government develops and implements a
foreign trade policy that encourages companies like IBM to retain domestic employment. Each administration,
Reagan, Bush, Clinton, GW Bush and Obama, have been and continue to develop "Free Trade Agreements" in
response to intense lobbying by corporations like IBM. Saying that "we can compete with anybody" repeatedly
does not make it so. That IBM Help Desk in India that pays $5.00 per hour versus U.S. at $20.00 or more is
tough to compete with unless we are willing to lower our wages and life style to that of India, China and
other third world countries. Sure someday, as their standard of living rises and ours declines to equality,
as has happened with Japan, we will be able to compete

Actually 5% of recent profits was reported as cost reduction, aka: headcount reduction. This doesn't factor
in the constant replacement of US workers with visa workers/indentured servants. In order to qualify for
the millions of dollars locally and likely billions nation wide for maintaining jobs, ibm has figured out
a way to fire American workers and 'retain jobs'. They do that by firing American's and replacing the with
visa workers. So the visa workers are getting screwed, American workers are getting screwed, the tax payers
are getting screwed, and executives continue to award themselves billions of dollars of stock options which,
even when given at a price of zero, they continue to unload. Now is that a great system or what! Workers
who don't have power can only get it through organizing, which executive are naturally afraid of since they
currently have free reign to lie, cheat, and steal currently.

IBMers! Be prepared for major layoffs. I am not sure how many IBMers in the USA are now employed, but
in 2008 it was around 115k.. I am hearing through my contacts IBM will be down to 77K USA Employees at the
end of 2010. Even the State of NY cannot save you...

So to paraphrase Shelton's response: "We are really big and we can do whatever we want - who cares
about those we discard, they don't mean anything to us any more. We will just get some new ones at a lower
pay rate" (or get some of those great H1B visa folks as was noted earlier by willjames) Pretty slick
how in the last two sentences it is noted that IBM "learned" something recently and then the next
sentence they have succeeded for over 100 year by managing in this way!

Well, I know for the majority of those 100 years you had a more experienced work force
( http://www.ibm.com/ibm/responsibility/employees.shtml ) i.e. more than 50% of your employees had better
than 5 years of experience! Also - for the majority of those years you didn't discard people when you wanted
to make a buck (yes, they are called that by some - people). Not "jobs" , not "skill base" and
not "resources". Good luck in the long term with your immoral business practices and your inexperienced
staff!

Hudson Valley Times Herald-Record: Union
group cites IBM layoffs. 13,000 names off database, Alliance says. By By George Spohr. Excerpts: IBM has removed
more than 13,000 names from its internal database of U.S. employees and contractors so far this year — significantly
more than previously believed. That's according to Alliance@IBM, a union-backed employee group that has undermined
IBM's new policy of not disclosing layoff numbers — "resource actions," as IBM calls them — or locations.
It is the highest number of U.S. position reductions yet to leak. The Alliance has maintained it has intelligence
showing IBM has plans to trim its North American work force by 16,000 employees this year. Through leaked copies
of IBM's own resource-action documents, the group has documented 10,403 layoffs so far, excluding contractors.
National coordinator Lee Conrad said his group is sticking by the 16,000 figure. "We still believe it to be
true," Conrad said.

The group has predicted with near-perfect accuracy each of the dozen or so — some major, others minor — waves
of layoffs this year at IBM. The company, like many of its peers in the tech industry, has shifted much of it
work force overseas, where wages are cheaper. ...

IBM's own strategy of acknowledging layoffs has been uneven. In the past, the company would acknowledge layoff
numbers and locations. But then in January, when the company began mass layoffs of its American workers, the
company dismissed reporters' inquiries as rumors or speculation. In recent months, the company's no-comment
policy has softened, but not to the point where it again is detailing layoff numbers or locations. "Most
matters of a company's internal operation, the public doesn't have an automatic right to that information," said
Chris MacDonald, author of the Business Ethics Blog. But given the barrage of negative publicity IBM has dealt
with, "I can imagine strategic consultants going either way on whether this is a wise thing, to keep things
quiet or to be more forthcoming," he said.

Radio Iowa: Ribbon
cutting for IBM's new Dubuque "delivery center". By O.Kay Henderson. Excerpts: Officials from IBM
are in Dubuque today to mark the opening of the company's newest "delivery center" that will eventually
employ over 1,200. Mike Daniels, senior vice president of IBM's Global Technology Services, is among those on hand
for this morning's ceremonial ribbon cutting. "We're up and running as of today. That's why we're here," Daniels
says. "We've already hired hundreds of employees. By the end of the year we expect that number to be 600.
We're right on schedule and by the end of 2010 we'll be fully operational with almost 1,300 people on board." ...

The State of Iowa gave IBM a package of incentives, including a $12 million forgivable loan. Officials estimate
state and local incentives for the project total more than $50 million. The IBM executive says his company also
was attracted to northeast Iowa because of the supply of "top talent" graduating from universities
in the region.

Zack's Investment Research: IBM
Opens IT Services Center in U.S. Excerpts: In addition to expanding its international footprint, IBM is
also expanding domestic operations. The company has announced the opening of a services delivery center in
the U.S. The new facility will maintain, monitor and support computer hardware, software and manage IT services
for IBM's clients. The new center joins an extensive network of more than 80 IBM delivery centers worldwide.
For the new facility, IBM intends to hire up to 1,300 people by the end of 2010.

Dubuque Herald-Tribune: Partnership of IBM, Dubuque
a 'smart' move. By Diane Diggelmann, Senior Location Executive - IBM Dubuque. Excerpts: When people, communities
and organizations come together, the world can change. As a new resident of this beautiful and historic city, I
am proud that IBM and Dubuque have come together. When I first visited here, I was struck not only by the city's
beauty, but the genuine friendliness and spirit of its people. Just as noticeable was the sense of pride that bursts
from those that call this place home. As I learn more about Dubuque, and the challenges this region has overcome,
I continue to be impressed and hopeful for the future. ...

Since moving here, many have shared with me their perspectives of the past, rightfully reminding me that this
is not just any city. This is a true community that buckled down and came together during tough times. It is
that spirit of civic cooperation -- combined with the education system, talented work force and Advertisement
overall quality of life -- that led to IBM choosing Dubuque for our newest Services Delivery Center, where we
provide technology services to our strategic outsourcing clients across the country

eWeek: Readers'
Comments on H-1B Visa Surprise Visits. Excerpts: This search for fraud misses the REAL problems with the
H-1B visa - 1) the "prevailing wage" nonsense and 2) the problems with portability - i.e., the difficulties
of an H-1B visa beneficiary of changing jobs. 1) Prevailing wage - this is a joke. There are large loopholes
in this portion of the H-1B visa laws which allows employers to LEGALLY underpay H-1B beneficiaries. Moreover,
it completely goes against the "free market" philosophy so many economists and corporate big-wigs love
to parrot. Why not let the market dictate wages? 2) Portability - when an H-1B visa beneficiary becomes unhappy
with his current employer, the H-1B visa laws do allow him to change employers, provided that another employer
is willing to take over his H-1B visa. However, when an H-1B visa beneficiary does change employers, he has to
re-file his Green Card application. So if he's been waiting for three years to get his Green Card, and then changes
employers, that three years is completely wasted. ...

I have about ZERO sympathy for these companies being audited and some being caught abusing the H-1B visas. This
has been going on for 15 YEARS; about time someone checked up on them. Sad it takes a recession of this magnitude
to move someone to stop abuses of what is nothing more than a cheap labor pool of indentured workers so US companies
can continue to live here and benefit from our society while undermining the ability of US workers to make a
living. We've let in over 200,000 of these H-1Bs in a single year in the past 15 years or so. England has a similar
program (used to be call the "Skilled Migrant Worker Programme"; know how many they typically let in?
About 1,000. That spells "SUCKER" for you and me, allowing in nearly a quarter of a million of these
people to be:

Stuck with their sponsoring company for 6 years (no raises, no bonuses); if they leave they have to find
a new company within X days, pay a fine and start their 6 year immigration clock over again.

Paid far less than the "prevailing wage" standard (which is itself far too loose as pay can range
all over for a given IT job title). This IS the reason these visas are sought - cheaper labor.

Today's Workforce: Michael
Steele and the Demise of Working America. By Robert Merriman. Excerpts: Nearly every week for the last six
months, as I drive along “Mainstreet” on my way to work, I’ve noticed a new storefront that has gone vacant. These
are not the vacant addresses that once housed “Old Navy” or “The House of Knives;” and 4th Avenue is not a strip
mall. These were shops and boutiques that operated and prospered for the last 20 or more years by catering to the
desires and whims of what had been one of the most prosperous communities in the nation. But ever since the mask
was removed from Bush’s depression last summer, many of these privileged professionals are finding themselves squeezed
financially in the same wringer as the rest of America’s middle class has been for quite some time. As a result,
one by one, these shops are falling by the wayside.

The American economy we see today is the end-result of political policies that have been transforming American
society for the past 30 years. Based on slogans such as privatization, de-regulation, free trade, out-sourcing,
“conservatism,” tax reform, and right to work, legislators have been giving American business what it wants since
the days of President Regan. They have turned this country into a place that no longer resembles the country
it was when I grew up in the 1950’s and 1960’s.

New on the Alliance@IBM Site

Comment 08/24/09: "What are employee forceouts and management initiated separations (like fireing
for cause that cannot be within an RA?). If these and contractors do not get packages with statistics,
how do you know they increased, and by about how many?" I don't have numbers, but in the past 12
months I've seen 3 people retire under my second line when it was clear they were not leaving by choice. We
were even told 2 of these guys were told if they didn't take retirement, someone else would get RA'ed. I suspect
a lot of this happened. In my previous 5 years, I'd never seen this happen. -NewToRchland--

Comment 08/26/09: According to BluePages, there have been about 13K names removed since 1/2009 in the USA.
Some may be contractors, but that's 13K people let go in the USA, about 10%. -Anonymous-

Comment 08/22/09: A brother in the UK- wrote: >>who is not even answering emails from his direct reports.
Are you able to expand on that? -anon- Our country GM is not answering emails from direct reports (and others)
that dare to question the decision to close the pension plan resulting in a lot of workers having no option
but to ask the company if they can have early retirement. The company is under no obligation to honor it and
indeed it is not doing so while the "pension consultation" is ongoing (this is a UK legal requirement
but it is really IBM reinforcing what it is going to do and it is not a negotiation by any stretch of the imagination).
The net effect is that this will decimate areas of the company where skills are already thin on the ground and
there is no plan to"offshore" any jobs, the slack will have to be picked up by those that are unlucky
enough to remain. There really is no plan B and it is just about cutting cost out so that the execs can make
Sam's numbers.

For those that are unlucky enough to remain the pension plan will be changed such that the early retirement
discount factor will move from 3% per annum, to a "cost neutral" basis - which means that it
is likely to be 7% per annum. So, these people will hang on as long as they can and then leave the company
at either a time of their choosing, or IBM's choosing. The goal in the UK is to have 20% of the staff on
PIPs (performance improvement plans) which will make it easier for HR to force them out the company with
no package.

Our govt sits around and does not protect us. IBM knows this and is forcing it to the nth degree. At
the moment PBC rating of 3 guarantees that you will be on a PIP. There are some very nasty letters being
sent by management in the UK to groups that do not do this with reminders that certain groups need to "tow
the line" or else.

As for offshoring it is well known in Hursley that in certain development areas that the teams in India
and Taiwan are just not up to the mark and resource has been diverted from other projects to"help
them out" shall we say. There are rumours that announcements are going to have to be delayed because
of this. Additionally, in Europe, contracts require that 20% of the deal utilizes "global resource".
Some companies are pushing back on this as they are saying that they do not want to speak to anyone in
anything but their own language (e.g. Italians only want to speak to Italians) and in the UK the same
is happening. Although we are multi-cultural as a legacy of the days of the Empire and the EU, the same
is also true of UK customers and they are tired of the hit and miss nature of dealing with BRIC countries,
however nice they may be (and they are nice and friendly I will concede that point).

There is a huge swell of people joining the union including 1st/2nd line managers, DE's and our GM is
getting a lot of letters from MP's demanding answers as to what he is playing at. There is talk of the
matter being brought up for debate in parliament (which is conveniently in recess) when it returns. IBM's
timing was deliberate and calculated to ensure that this was the case. They (IBM) are spitting blood
over the negative publicity as this, in an already tough climate, damages IBM. As you can imagine we
do not care one iota. Many people are leaking IBM Confidential information to the press, as IBM refuses
to play ball in a number of areas. One example is that somehow, amazingly, IBM cannot provide our representatives
on the consultation committee with a distribution list of all those of us that are affected by this pension
change. Imagine that with all the resource that IBM has!

So, it is having to be done by word of mouth and sending emails to certain people that you think may
still be in the same pension plan as you. It has galvanized certain areas of the company and should send
a signal out to the rest of it (most have their head in the sand to put it politely) as this is the beginning
of the end for IBM in the UK. There are a lot of disaffected people that are now working to rule (our
rule is a 37 hour working week) and phones and sametime go off pretty quick these days. Trying to get
help or emails answered unless they are mates of yours is nigh on impossible and this pleases a lot of
us immensely.

The *only* thing IBM understands is being hit in the pocket and this is happening already - which of
course means that more cost will be taken out of the company to inflate profits. For me personally after
5th April 2010 this company can sink without a trace and I will do all I can to help that when the right
offer comes along. I am not alone in this. One way or another there are 3000 people that want revenge
and will get it in their own way, hopefully at a time of their choosing. If I stay with IBM I will be
certain to look for payback on certain people/areas that did not stand with us. Does this make me the
same as "them"? I am not certain, and nor will I care I am afraid to say. I will look after "brothers",
and the people I know of old that are are affected by this, the rest can go to hell.

This has been a short sharp shock to me and I realize that I have to look after myself as no-one else
will I have discovered. Two months ago if you had told me that I would be writing like this I would have
laughed at you. All rather sad. I think what really sticks in a lot of our throats worldwide is that
we built this company over (for me at least, 25 years of hard work) and it is being given away to countries
that are cheap to increase the execs bank balance, and that hurts me more than anything. A bond that
I thought existed has been broken and there is no going back from this. -A brother in the UK-

Comment 08/22/09: Yesterday, received letter from Employee services that my cobra has been terminated for
non-timely payment. With no warning of any kind! Payment was sent by me on time, they received it (or claim
to have received it )one day later than 'due date' and CASHED my check!! And happily terminated my coverage.
This is outrageous! Of course I got on the phone immediately, and my 'issue' has been sent to some 'research
team', now I have to wait for their decision. I am ready to hire a lawyer if they do not reinstate me! I am
just warning you all to be careful, because they are ready to pull the plug on you any moment.. If anyone has
dealt with this, please share. -maria- (moved from job cut reports)

Comment 08/22/09: >>In the UK we are being shafted too on the pension front. Unfortunately the
of my colleagues disappoint me by not seeing this as just the start and have their heads up their butts in
most cases with the "well it doesn't affect me" attitude. -A brother in the UK-: Welcome to IBM America
circa 1999. Please, take action. Otherwise you too will be reduced to talking on a message board ten years hence
and your pension will be a 1/3 of what it should be and you will have no medical when you most need it. -anonymouse-

Comment 08/22/09: Maria - the same thing happened to me. I wrote one check in the wrong amount (did not add
dental). After I called to complain, they reinstated -- telling me that you get "one" forgiven. Use
automatic deduction from your checking - because unless you mail it certified, return receipt requested, you
can't prove that they received it by the date due. -annonymous-

Comment 08/24/09: Silly Willy, for anyone considering the Match program with India as a destination, I'd recommend
they do some research on disease stats in India. Note this Outbreak Notice for Meningococcal Disease in India
(August 24, 2009) (commonly referred to as meningitis or epidemic meningitis). I also found a WHO report on "Combating
[deadly] diarrhoeal disease in India [water borne]". I saw CNN report recently that TB was epidemic. And
a BBC report "Encephalitis kills 200 in India". At the minimum, definitely not an advised destination
for children with developing immune systems http://wwwn.cdc.gov/travel/content/outbreak-notice/meningococcal-india.aspx -RAed 2009-

Comment 08/24/09: Speaking of the match program, Has anyone, anywhere actually done this, other than people
who where natives of the country they where being relocated to? Just wondering if there is anyone that stupid
and gutless. -anon-

Comment 08/24/09: This depression has been caused by globalism and there is no way out of it until the system
is changed. Sooner or later you have to admit that there is a global class war going on. Shipping jobs to the
Third World gutted our economy. The more they globalize the worse things get but the system won’t change until
it goes completely bankrupt (I give it 5-10 years at most). As long as the Palmisanos can tell Washington what
to do, the crap will continue until the final collapse. We are witnessing the end of the American Empire.

You can’t have the economy running abroad and still remain a wealthy country and a superpower. It’s either
or. So what can we do to defend ourselves? Please join a union, hook up with other people who are equally
fed up, form a group, start a new party, help preparing to replace this corrupt to the bone global pile
of crap.

The future is a system where big business will be exiled from politics. Go ahead and call me a commie,
however do you still want to cater to these disgusting upper class greedbags after you lose your job,
home, cars, health insurance, pension, kids’ future, everything? When poverty bites you in the @ss, you
may rethink this whole commie thing. Instead of raising the flag every morning and supporting the war
think of our children who were sent to die for the bonuses of corporate CEOs so the likes of Sam Palmisano
can buy yet another luxury yacht, jet and private island. These “people” have no shame.

Our parents in the 60s knew something that our generation still needs to learn: nothing in life is granted
and you can only have what you are ready to fight for. So, what have you done today to fight for your
rights? There are so many of us, we can make a difference, but we must start doing something! Joining
a union is doing something. -Angry pro-union dude-

Comment 08/25/09: Does anyone know how long one can sit on the bench in GTS these days before getting whacked?
Also any word of cuts during sept to get ready for 4th Q? Thanks all. -Tony- (moved from job cut reports)

Comment 08/28/09: Has anyone heard any rumors of layoffs in September? Things are pretty quiet. I haven't
heard anything which concerns me. Usually there are rumors of layoffs, then all goes quiet right before we are
hit. Are we in the 'quiet' period right now? -dun-4-

Raise and Salary Comments IBM CEO Sam Palmisano: "I
am pleased to announce that we will not only be paying bonuses to IBMers worldwide, based on individual performance,
but that they'll be funded from a pool of money nearly the same size as last year's. That's significant in this
economy -- and especially so, given the size of the 2007 pool. Further, our salary increase plan will continue,
covering about 60 percent of our workforce. As always, increases will go to our highest performers and contributors.
We should all feel good about the company's ability to invest in people in these very concrete ways."

Comment 08/29/09: Country = United Kingdom; Union Affiliate = UNITE(UK); Job Title = Technical Support Specialist;
IBM Division = GTS; Message = I have been dismayed for years about the erosion of the relationship between
management and staff. PBC's forced into a 'downward assessment', education all but killed off (ultimately
'dumbing down' employee technical abilities). Management have imposed a methodology of 'divide and conquer',
by - amongst others - awarding pay-rises to those lucky enough to get any according to PBC standings. They
have for years used too much stick, and quite simply no carrot. The company (UK) used to be able to boast
a workforce that would walk over 'hot coals' in the name of IBM. Fiercely loyal, passionately believing
in IBM, and would never, ever countenance the thought of having any union representation. Since the early
1990's the erosion of IBM - both as a company, and as an employer is astounding. This is - in my mind -
nothing short of criminal mismanagement. 'Big Blue' is being captained by 'Capt. Ahab', and navigated
through corporate waters by 'Blind Pew', totally oblivious to the catastrophe ahead. They WILL NEVER regain
the loyalty, trust, and belief from their workforce again ......... I do believe they are sounding the
'Lloyds Bell' for the 'once great ship' IBM...... -justaUKmule-

New York Times: Daschle
Has Ear of White House and Industry. By David D. Kirkpatrick. Excerpts: Six months have passed since the morning
when Tom Daschle, the former Senate Democratic leader, under fire for not paying certain taxes, called President
Obama in his study off the Oval Office to withdraw his nomination as health secretary and reform czar. But these
days it often seems as if Mr. Daschle never left the picture. With unrivaled ties on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue,
he talks constantly with top White House advisers, many of whom previously worked for him.

He still speaks frequently to the president, who met with him as recently as Friday morning in the Oval Office.
And he remains a highly paid policy adviser to hospital, drug, pharmaceutical and other health care industry
clients of Alston & Bird, the law and lobbying firm. Now the White House and Senate Democratic leaders
appear to be moving toward a blueprint for overhauling the health system, centered on nonprofit insurance cooperatives,
that Mr. Daschle began promoting two months ago as a politically feasible alternative to a more muscular government-run
insurance plan.

It is an idea that happens to dovetail with the interests of many Alston & Bird clients, like the insurance
giant UnitedHealth and the Tennessee Hospital Association. And it is drawing angry cries of accommodation
from more liberal House Democrats bent on including a public insurance plan.

New York Times editorial: Who Wants
to Yell Next? Excerpt: The
cacophony at town hall meetings on health care has startled too many members of Congress into passivity and
pandering. But not Representative Barney Frank, who did not shrink last week from a woman loudly demanding
to know why he supported President Obama’s “Nazi policy.” The Massachusetts Democrat responded with a question
of his own: “On what planet do you spend most of your time?” None of the I-respect-your-opinion razzmatazz being
mouthed by more timorous politicians. Mr. Frank could have been more civil. It is time for everyone to remember
that town hall sessions were invented for rational discussions of differences, not as an outlet for self-therapy
caperings à la “The Gong Show.” But it was certainly refreshing to hear him try to jolly or shame his audience
into a serious debate, asking, “Which one of you wants to yell next?”

New York Times editorial: About
Your 401(k). Excerpt: A thornier problem is that even someone who steadily contributes to a 401(k) and makes
sensible investments can end up with too little — depending on whether the markets are up or down as retirement
nears. A calculation by Gary Burtless of the Brookings Institution showed that a 401(k) participant who retired
in 2008 after contributing 4 percent of pay over 40 years and investing in a conservative mix of stocks and bonds
would be able to replace a fourth of his pre-retirement income. That is only half as much as a similar worker
who retired during the bull market in 1999, but far better than retiring in 1974 when markets were in a swoon.

New York Times op-ed: All the
President’s Zombies. By Paul Krugman. The debate over the “public option” in health care has been dismaying
in many ways. Perhaps the most depressing aspect for progressives, however, has been the extent to which opponents
of greater choice in health care have gained traction — in Congress, if not with the broader public — simply by
repeating, over and over again, that the public option would be, horrors, a government program.

Washington, it seems, is still ruled by Reaganism — by an ideology that says government intervention is always
bad, and leaving the private sector to its own devices is always good. Call me naïve, but I actually hoped
that the failure of Reaganism in practice would kill it. It turns out, however, to be a zombie doctrine: even
though it should be dead, it keeps on coming.

Let’s talk for a moment about why the age of Reagan should be over. First of all, even before the current
crisis Reaganomics had failed to deliver what it promised. Remember how lower taxes on high incomes and deregulation
that unleashed the “magic of the marketplace” were supposed to lead to dramatically better outcomes for everyone?
Well, it didn’t happen.

To be sure, the wealthy benefited enormously: the real incomes of the top .01 percent of Americans rose
sevenfold between 1980 and 2007. But the real income of the median family rose only 22 percent, less than
a third its growth over the previous 27 years. Moreover, most of whatever gains ordinary Americans achieved
came during the Clinton years. President George W. Bush, who had the distinction of being the first Reaganite
president to also have a fully Republican Congress, also had the distinction of presiding over the first
administration since Herbert Hoover in which the typical family failed to see any significant income gains. ...

There’s a lot to be said about the financial disaster of the last two years, but the short version is simple:
politicians in the thrall of Reaganite ideology dismantled the New Deal regulations that had prevented banking
crises for half a century, believing that financial markets could take care of themselves. The effect was
to make the financial system vulnerable to a 1930s-style crisis — and the crisis came. “We have always known
that heedless self-interest was bad morals,” said Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1937. “We know now that it
is bad economics.” And last year we learned that lesson all over again. ...

The debate over the public option has, as I said, been depressing in its inanity. Opponents of the option
— not just Republicans, but Democrats like Senator Kent Conrad and Senator Ben Nelson — have offered no coherent
arguments against it. Mr. Nelson has warned ominously that if the option were available, Americans would
choose it over private insurance — which he treats as a self-evidently bad thing, rather than as what should
happen if the government plan was, in fact, better than what private insurers offer.

But it’s much the same on other fronts. Efforts to strengthen bank regulation appear to be losing steam,
as opponents of reform declare that more regulation would lead to less financial innovation — this just months
after the wonders of innovation brought our financial system to the edge of collapse, a collapse that was
averted only with huge infusions of taxpayer funds.

Associated Press, courtesy of Fort Worth Star-Telegram: Insurers
explore savings in healthcare abroad. By Tom Murphy. Excerpts: Elizabeth Kunz of South Carolina left her
dentist’s office this spring with a mouth full of problems and no way to pay for them. She went out of her
way — to Central America — to find a solution. Her trip to the tropics is part of a health insurance experiment
for trimming medical costs: overseas care. As Washington searches for ways to tame the country’s escalating
healthcare costs, more insurers are offering networks of surgeons and dentists in places like India and Costa
Rica, where costs can be as much as 80 percent less than in the United States.

Until recently, most Americans traveling abroad for cheaper nonemergency medical care were either uninsured
or wealthy. But the profile of medical tourists is changing. Now, they are more likely to be people covered
by private insurers, which are looking to keep costs from spiraling out of control.

Workforce Management: House Panel Asks Health
Insurers for Executive Pay, Other Financials. Excerpt: A House committee with jurisdiction over health care
reform legislation has sent letters to more than 50 major commercial health insurers asking them to identify by
name each executive who earned at least $500,000 a year in any year from 2003 to 2008. The letter, signed by Rep.
Henry Waxman, D-California, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and several other Democratic panel
members, asks for salary information for those individuals, as well as bonuses and the fair value of stock and option
awards, among other things. The letter also requests premium payments, claims payments, sales expenses, administrative
expenses and profits for 2005 to 2008.

Crooks and Liars: Krugman:
Why is Obama Letting Reaganite Rhetoric Shape the Debate? By
Susie Madrak. Excerpts: The astonishing thing about the current political scene is the extent to which nothing has
changed. The debate over the public option has, as I said, been depressing in its inanity. Opponents of the option
— not just Republicans, but Democrats like Senator Kent Conrad and Senator Ben Nelson — have offered no coherent
arguments against it. Mr. Nelson has warned ominously that if the option were available, Americans would choose it
over private insurance — which he treats as a self-evidently bad thing, rather than as what should happen if the
government plan was, in fact, better than what private insurers offer.

But it’s much the same on other fronts. Efforts to strengthen bank regulation appear to be losing steam, as
opponents of reform declare that more regulation would lead to less financial innovation — this just months
after the wonders of innovation brought our financial system to the edge of collapse, a collapse that was averted
only with huge infusions of taxpayer funds.

So why won’t these zombie ideas die?

Part of the answer is that there’s a lot of money behind them. “It is difficult to get a man to understand
something,” said Upton Sinclair, “when his salary” — or, I would add, his campaign contributions — “depend
upon his not understanding it.” In particular, vast amounts of insurance industry money have been flowing
to obstructionist Democrats like Mr. Nelson and Senator Max Baucus, whose Gang of Six negotiations have been
a crucial roadblock to legislation.

Jim Hightower: Rick Scotts Latest Fraud. Excerpts: Our country's
corporatized health care system is so uncaring that 76 percent of Americans tell pollsters it must be "fundamentally
changed" or "completely rebuilt." But Rick Scott says uh-uh – what health care needs is more corporatization
– and even Wal-Martization.

Rick who? He's the ex-CEO of the massive Columbia/HCA hospital chain and a laissez-fairyland zealot who is
feverishly opposing Barack Obama's health reform ideas. I say "ex-CEO" because his profit-above-all-else
approach to running Columbia ran it into a very deep ditch – and got him fired in 1997. Among his "health
care" tactics were overbilling Medicare, giving kickbacks to doctors who referred patients to his hospitals,
and dangerously understaffing hospitals to cut costs. Columbia later pled guilty and paid $1.7 billion to settle
fraud charges against it.

Yet, he's running TV ads and infomercials featuring him as a health care "expert." Scott's ads
attack Obama with that tired, old bugaboo of "Government Run Health Care," and to coordinate his
attack, he has hired the same PR hacks who ran the infamous "Swift Boat Veterans" assault on John
Kerry in 2004.

Scott's television blitz features theatrical horror stories of "socialized medicine," direly warning
that this is Obama's plan. Only... it isn't. Not even close. Private doctors, nurses, and others of our choosing
would continue to provide our health care. The change that Obama seeks is merely in how we pay these practitioners.
By offering a new "public option" we'd have the choice of sticking with an insurance corporation,
or buying into a public insurance pool.

New York Times editorial: World’s
Best Health Care. Excerpts: Critics of President Obama’s push for health care reform have been whipping up fear
that proposed changes will destroy our “world’s best” medical system and make it like supposedly inferior systems
elsewhere.

The emptiness of those claims became apparent recently when researchers from the Urban Institute released
a report analyzing studies that have compared the clinical effectiveness and quality of care in the United
States with the care dispensed in other advanced nations. They found a mixed bag, with the United States doing
better in some areas, like cancer care, and worse in others, like preventing deaths from treatable and preventable
conditions.

The bottom line was unmistakable. The analysts found no support for the claim routinely made by politicians
that American health care is the best in the world and no hard evidence of any particular area in which American
health care is truly exceptional. ...

Contrary to what one hears in political discourse, the bulk of the research comparing the United States
and Canada found a higher quality of care in our northern neighbor. Canadians, for example, have longer survival
times while undergoing renal dialysis and after a kidney transplant. Of 10 studies comparing the care given
to a broad range of patients suffering from a diverse group of ailments, five favored Canada, three yielded
mixed results, and only two favored the United States.

New York Times: The
Problem With Prevention. By Michelle Andrews. Excerpts: In a podcast on his Web site, Senator Tom Harkin, the
Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee point person on prevention, had this to say (MP3): “The
full panoply of wellness and prevention provisions in our bill will result in countless tens of billions of dollars
in annual savings.”

If only it were that simple. Nearly 40 percent of all deaths in the United States every year are a result
of smoking, poor diet, lack of exercise or alcohol abuse. Preventing those behaviors or reducing their incidence
is likely to save money. And one thing that everyone seems to agree on is that putting money toward community-based
activities is a good thing, from widening sidewalks so people can get out and walk to getting fresh fruits
and vegetables into grocery stores and healthy lunches into school cafeterias. ...

But the picture is murkier for other preventive interventions. Very few actually save money. A study published
in The American Journal of Preventive Medicine in 2006 examined 25 common preventive services and found that
just a handful resulted in savings (PDF). These included childhood immunizations, offering to help smokers
kick the habit and discussing daily aspirin use with people at risk for heart disease.

New York Times: Kennedy
Death Adds Volatile Element to Health Fight. By Carl Hulse and Katharine Q. Seelye. Excerpts: The death of Senator
Edward M. Kennedy has quickly become a rallying point for Democratic advocates of a broad health care overhaul,
a signature Kennedy issue that became mired in partisanship while he fought his illness away from the Capitol. “The
passion of his life was health care reform,” said Representative David R. Obey, the liberal Wisconsin Democrat who
is chairman of the Appropriations Committee. “Above all else, he would want us to redouble our efforts to achieve
it.”

Yet Democrats have serious internal differences on how to approach health care, and Republicans and Democrats
remain deeply divided on the policy proposals — a gulf some say Mr. Kennedy was uniquely equipped to bridge.
It seemed unlikely that Republicans would suddenly soften their firm opposition in the aftermath of Mr. Kennedy’s
death or that Democrats would relent on their push for substantial change, especially for a government-run
insurance plan, which Mr. Kennedy endorsed.

New York Times op-ed: Congress’s
Health Care Numbers Don’t Add Up. By Jon R. Gabel. Excerpts: For competence and integrity, few organizations
command more respect in Washington than the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. As health care reform makes
its way through Congress, the budget office’s assessment of how much various elements might cost may determine
the details of legislation, and whether it ultimately passes. But when it comes to forecasting the costs of reform,
the budget office’s record is suspect. In each of the past three decades, when assessing major changes in Medicare,
it has substantially underestimated the savings the changes would bring.

In the early 1980s, Congress changed the way Medicare paid hospitals so that payments would no longer be based
on costs incurred. Instead, hospitals would receive a predetermined amount per admission, based on the patient’s
primary medical problem. This encouraged shorter stays, led to fewer diagnostic services and reduced administrative
costs. The Congressional Budget Office predicted that, from 1983 to 1986, this change would slow Medicare hospital
spending (which had been rising much faster than the rate of inflation) by $10 billion, and that by 1986 total
spending would be $60 billion. Actual spending in 1986 was $49 billion. The savings in 1986 alone were as much
as three years of estimated savings. ...

The budget office’s cautious methods may have unintended consequences in the current health care reform
effort. By underestimating the savings that can come from improved Medicare payment procedures and other
cost-control initiatives, the budget office leads Congress to think that politically unpopular cost-cutting
initiatives will have, at best, only modest effects. This, in turn, forces Congress to believe it can pay
for reform only by raising taxes, which then makes reform legislation more difficult to pass.

Washington Post: 5
Myths About Health Care Around the World. By T.R. Reid. Excerpts: As Americans search for the cure to what
ails our health-care system, we've overlooked an invaluable source of ideas and solutions: the rest of the world.
All the other industrialized democracies have faced problems like ours, yet they've found ways to cover everybody
-- and still spend far less than we do.

I've traveled the world from Oslo to Osaka to see how other developed democracies provide health care.
Instead of dismissing these models as "socialist," we could adapt their solutions to fix our problems. To
do that, we first have to dispel a few myths about health care abroad:

Huffington Post: Fear,
Greed and X-Rays. By Dr. Andrew Weil. Excerpts: Fear and greed are potent motivators. When both of these forces
push in the same direction, virtually no human being can resist. And doctors -- despite many expectations to
the contrary -- are human beings. This is one reason why medical costs in the U.S. have spiraled out of control,
yet we are among the least
healthy people in the developed world. ...

Along with over-scanning, over-biopsying, over-blood-working and other diagnostic excesses, fear propels over-treatment.
Anytime a physician diverges from standard U.S. treatment protocols, nearly all of which skew toward expensive
drugs and surgery, lawsuit-fear looms. "Defensive treatment" strips physicians of clinical judgment,
costs billions and leaves patients less healthy, but it's hard to blame physicians who practice it. As one
wearily told me, "You never forget your first lawsuit."

Physicians like to discuss the fear side, because it shifts the blame to lawyers. The greed side, however,
deserves just as much scrutiny and reform. Consider "The
Cost Conundrum: What a Texas town can teach us about health care," a must-read New Yorker article by Atul Gawande, M.D. Gawande visited McAllen,
Texas, to discover why per-capita health care expenditures there are the highest in the nation. He found
that many physicians in high-medical-cost cities such as McAllen have a diversified "revenue stream," the
result of what one hospital administrator termed "entrepreneurial spirit." This "spirit" often
manifested in physicians owning their own medical testing equipment, which meant the more tests they ordered,
the more money they made. A 2002 University of North Carolina study showed doctors who own imaging equipment
sent patients for roughly two
to eight times more imaging tests than those who don't own.

In Gawande's article, a McAllen doctor who refused to hop aboard this gravy train had a more sensible take
on the local "spirit." "Medicine has become a pig trough here," he said. "We took
a wrong turn when doctors stopped being doctors and became businessmen."

Los Angeles Times: President
Obama: Healthcare; you promised. An open letter reminds the president of the major campaign vow that got
him into the White House. By Anne Lamott. Excerpts: I am afraid there has been a misunderstanding since that
election in 2008, during which 66,882,230 Americans cast their votes for you. Perhaps one of your trusted
advisors has given you bum information. Maybe they told you that we voted for you -- walked, marched, prayed,
fund-raised and knocked on doors for you -- because we hoped you would try to reunite the country. Of the
total votes cast that long-ago November day, I'm guessing that about 1,575 people wanted you to try to reconcile
the toxic bipartisanship that culminated in those Sarah Palin rallies.

The other 66,880,655 of us wanted universal healthcare. ...

And Mr. President, that is what the Republicans are saying to you: They are just not that into you, sir.
This may have thrown you for such a loop that you have forgotten why you were elected -- which was to lead
your people back to the promises of our founding parents. Many of us no longer recognized our country after
eight years of Bush and Cheney, and you gave us your word that you would help restore the great headway
we had made on matters of race, equality and plain old social justice.

People, get ready, you said; there's a train a 'coming. And we did get ready. We hit the streets. We roared,
whispered, cried, whooped and went door to door, convinced that even if Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. had
not specifically dreamed of you, his dream of justice and equality and pride might come into being through
your vision, your greatness, through the hope that your words gave us, through the change you promised.
He dreamed of a leader like you. Just like you. And something in the deepest part of this country's soul
heard. ...

We did not know exactly how you would proceed to restore our beloved Constitution. It seemed beyond redemption,
like my kitchen floor did briefly last week after my dog, Bodhi, accidentally ate 24 corn bread muffins.
You said you would push back your sleeves and begin, that it would take all of us working harder than we
ever had before, but that you would lead. While acknowledging the financial and moral devastation of the
last eight years, you said you would start by giving your people healthcare. You would do battle with the
conservatives and insurance companies. You said in your beautiful way many times that this was the overarching
moral and spiritual issue of our times, and we understood this to mean that you took this to be your Selma,
your Little Rock.

I hate to sound like a betrayed 7-year-old, but you said. And we believed you. Now you seem to have abandoned
the dream. That is why moderates and liberals and progressives like myself all seem a little tense this
summer. It is time to call your spirit back. We will be here to help when you get back from vacation. We
want to help you get over the disappointment of Mr. Grassley's cold shoulder, of Mr. Enzi blowing you off,
even that nice Olympia Snowe standing you up. We can and will take to the streets again, march and hold
peaceful rallies, go door to door, donate to any causes that will help get out the truth of what a public
option would mean. But we need you to shake off the dust of the journey and remember the promises of Dr.
King, and we need you to lead us toward what is no longer so distant a shore.

Do it for Teddy Kennedy, boss. Do it for the other Kennedys too, for Dr. King, for Big Mama, for the poorest
kids you met on the trail, the kids who go to emergency rooms for their healthcare, do it for their mothers
and for Michelle. Just do it. Trusting you, Mr. Obama.

News and Opinion Concerning the U.S. Financial Crisis

"It is a restatement of laissez-faire-let things take their natural course
without government interference. If people manage to become prosperous, good. If they starve, or have no
place to live, or no money to pay medical bills, they have only themselves to blame; it is not the responsibility
of society. We mustn't make people dependent on government- it is bad for them, the argument goes. Better
hunger than dependency, better sickness than dependency."

"But dependency on government has never been bad for the rich. The pretense of the
laissez-faire people is that only the poor are dependent on government, while the rich take care of themselves.
This argument manages to ignore all of modern history, which shows a consistent record of laissez-faire
for the poor, but enormous government intervention for the rich." From Economic
Justice: The American Class System, from the book Declarations of Independence by
Howard Zinn.

Wall Street Journal: Goldman's
Trading Tips Reward Its Biggest Clients. By Susanne Craig. Excerpt: Goldman Sachs Group Inc. research analyst
Marc Irizarry's published rating on mutual-fund manager Janus Capital Group Inc. was a lackluster "neutral" in
early April 2008. But at an internal meeting that month, the analyst told dozens of Goldman's traders the stock
was likely to head higher, company documents show. The next day, research-department employees at Goldman called
about 50 favored clients of the big securities firm with the same tip, including hedge-fund companies Citadel
Investment Group and SAC Capital Advisors, the documents indicate. Readers of Mr. Irizarry's research didn't
find out he was bullish until his written report was issued six days later, after Janus shares had jumped 5.8%.

New York Times: Rise
of the Super-Rich Hits a Sobering Wall. By David Leonhardt and Geraldine Fabrikant. Excerpts: The rich have
been getting richer for so long that the trend has come to seem almost permanent. They began to pull away from
everyone else in the 1970s. By 2006, income was more concentrated at the top than it had been since the late
1920s. The recent news about resurgent Wall Street pay has seemed to suggest that not even the Great Recession
could reverse the rise in income inequality.

But economists say — and data is beginning to show — that a significant change may in fact be under way. The
rich, as a group, are no longer getting richer. Over the last two years, they have become poorer. And many
may not return to their old levels of wealth and income anytime soon. ...

Bill Gates, Warren E. Buffett, the heirs to the Wal-Mart Stores fortune and the founders of Google each
lost billions last year, according to Forbes magazine. In one stark example, John McAfee, an entrepreneur
who founded the antivirus software company that bears his name, is now worth about $4 million, from a peak
of more than $100 million. Mr. McAfee will soon auction off his last big property because he needs cash to
pay his bills after having been caught off guard by the simultaneous crash in real estate and stocks.

Jim Hightower: Compensating Wall Street's Sociopaths. Excerpts:
The chilling caw of the raven in Edgar Allen Poe's classic tale of horror was, "Nevermore." In a
modern update, however, a covey of greed-crested Wall Street bankers have one-upped Poe with an on-going tale
of financial horror in which their incessant, bone-chilling cry is: "Evermore." As in evermore money
for themselves – fatter salaries, guaranteed bonuses, expansive perks... more, more, more.

If you thought that Wall Street's birds-of-a-feather would be embarrassed by their disastrous management failures,
chastened by the collapsed of their banks, shamed by the massive government bailouts, and humbled by the public's
disgust at their greed, you don't know your birds. This particular breed has a sense of entitlement that's
bigger than all of Dallas. A recent study, for example found that even as nine of Wall Streets biggest bank
failures were grabbing bailout money last year, they were lavishing bonuses of more than a million bucks apiece
on about 5,000 of their top bankers. These banks lost a total of $81 billion in 2008 and went begging to Uncle
Sam for $165 billion in direct bailout funds – yet they merrily awarded $32 billion in bonuses to their executives!

Yes, that means they used our tax dollars to cover this bonus-for-failure program.

This year, the same flock of Entitled Ones is already setting aside billions of dollars for executives
bonuses to be paid at the end of the year, and they’ve even returned to the cuckoo practice of guaranteeing
themselves multimillion-dollar bonuses – no matter how they perform. It's time we quit pampering these sociopaths
by allowing their absurd sense of self-entitlement to swamp common sense and the common good. No mere banker
should be paid a dime more than what a good teacher, a fire fighter, or a nurse makes.

Vault Message Board Posts

"Raises
are effective 7/1" by "bigbertha92". Full excerpt: Don't expect a raise if you're a 2 performer.
Only top contributors (1 & 2+) will receive a raise. The raise will most likely be around 1%. No kidding. Executives
are not getting raises this year.

"IBM
Just don't get it" by " Toa". Full excerpt: If you get the same money for a half ar*ed effort
as you do for a good effort then why bother trying to do a good job! I've even seen 2+ being downgraded to a
2 because the manager didn't believe the 2+ was valid.

"Let's
Go Global!" by "bigbertha92". Excerpts: Everything is "global" - from EO training to
forced-by-mgmt-to-take IBM learning courses. Learn when no means yes, how not to be offensive, and watch slang!

We all have to play nice-nice with our GR (global resource) peers. and when your GR team lead sends notes
to IBM US mgmt that they need MORE WORK from their US counterparts, IBM mgmt. rolls over and gives them more
work. Reminds me of an old CCR song: Fortunate
Son.

And when you ask them, how much should we give? Ooh, they only answer more! more! more. What a sad, pathetic,
f'ng company.

"The
Truth Can't Be Told" by "Frank_Reality". Full excerpt: Yes, even though the GRs in India can't
handle simple tasks on time, with adequate quality and within cost, they are given more and more responsibility
they cannot begin to handle. And of course when they screw up and fail as often happens, it's always the US teams'
fault. It is pathetic (and clueless) to reward this incompetence with more work and more responsibilities.

What's more pathetic is how India is not held accountable since they are Sam's chosen ones and how anyone
who reports problems with India are considered anti-team, racist and uncooperative.

The sacred cows over in India aren't cattle, they're the "office boys" pretending to be IT professionals
working for IBM. What a sad, pathetic f'ng company indeed.

If you hire good people and treat them well, they will try to do a good job.
They will stimulate one another by their vigor and example.
They will set a fast pace for themselves.
Then if they are well led and occasionally inspired, if they understand what the company is trying to do and know they will
share in its sucess, they will contribute in a major way.
The customer will get the superior service he is looking for. The result is profit to customers, employees, and to stcckholders.
—Thomas J. Watson, Jr., from A
Business and Its Beliefs: The Ideas That Helped Build IBM.

This site is designed to allow IBM Employees to communicate and share methods of protecting their rights through the
establishment of an IBM Employees Labor Union. Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act states it is a
violation for Employers to spy on union gatherings, or pretend to spy. For the purpose of the National Labor Relations
Act, notice is given that this site and all of its content, messages, communications, or other content is considered
to be a union gathering.